The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1887-10-18
Supreme Court.
OCTOBER TERM, 1887.

MONDAY, October 10th.
Kane VS.. Nakaleka Criminal conduct
w. 0. Smith for plaintiff; Paul Neumann for
defendant.
TUESDAY, October 18th.
Kane VS.. Nakaleka Criminal conversa-
ton. w. o. Smith for plaintiff; Paul Neu-
mann for defendant. This case was resumed
from Monday, occupying all day before Il
Hawaiian jury. The latter retired at 3:25 p,
M, and at O'Clock returned with a verdict
for the plaintiff for SIP 80 damages, two
jurors dissenting.
WEDNESDAY, October 18th.
Kamaka VS.. Kipi. Eiectment. c. Brown
for plaintiff; Smith & Kinney for defendant.
Before Hawaiian jury.
THURSDAY, October 18th.
]. s. Webb, committed for trial by the
Chief Justice, as reported IN Wednesdays
GAZETTE. was indicted for embezzlement of
public money. The Indictment was read by
the Attorney-General. and charged that the
defendant had, on or about the Sd of June,
1885, embezzled the sum of Ssh
Defendant pleaded guilty to the charge.
The Court said that counsel or the defend
ant in person would be heard, if they had
any remarks to offer.
w. f. Castle, for the defense, cited the
law by which the penalty is regulated, and
stated that if the case had come to trial it
would have been put in evidence that an
agreement existed between defendant and
ex-Minister Gibson, by which the former
was to be remunerated for extra service;
that 1t had been customary in the Foreign
Office to have an accounting at the end of
every year, but that the accounting had been
omitted at the end of last year. owing to the
hustle of getting the Kaimioa ready for sea.
Counsel also asked the Court to take into
consideration the fact that defendant had
returned to the country, although knowing
the changes that had taken place in affairs,
which he would not have done had he been
conscious of having committed any crime.
As the penalty of embeZzlement of public
moneys is imprisonment for life or for a
shorter period, or fine not exceeding five
times the amount eunbeZzled, he hoped the
Court would not iufiict the first part of the
penalty. but would be content with the
second.
The Aforementioned said that an under
standing had been come to between himself
and counsel for the defense that if the de
PENDANT pleaded guilty no speeches would be
made and that the prosecuting attorneys
duty would end with the plea of guile being
entered. There were two points, however,
that be thought it would be proper for him
to refer to in reply to the remarks of the
counsel for defendant, which he could do
without breaking faith with him. The first
was that in the Appropriation Bill the sum
of $3.50 per month was allowed as the salary
of the Clerk of the Foreign Office, and Mr..
Gibson had no authority to add to it, and
besides this claim for extra pay had only
turned up since Mr.. Webb's return. The
second point was that during a period in
which defendants full salary amounted to
s., 500, he had deposited with his banker to
his own private credit the sum of $4,000
The omission of the regular accounting
was in conflict with the statute that officers
of government, if on the island of Oahu, are
required TO hold accountings weekly.
The Court having such wide latitude under
the law, in pronouncing sentence, he would /
leave the matter to His Honor the presiding
Justice, without further suggestion.
In answer to enquiry, the Court said that {
sentence would be e.ven Friday morning.
The foreign jurors were called.
The King vs.. May. Selling liquor without I
license. Defendant pleaded not guilty. At
tornev- General for the Grown; A. G. Smith
and W A. Kinney for defendant. The case
ended III mol pros:
Th5 King VS.. Loo Sing. Selling opium.
Appeal from tue Police Court, Honolulu. [
Hatch for the Crown; Smith & Kinney for I
defendant. Verdict. not guilty.
FRIDAY. October 14th.
j. S. Webb, for embezzlement of Govern
ment moneys, is sentenced to one years i'm (
prisonment.
The King vs.. Lum Hung. Selling opium.
Foreign jury.